|
|
Post by BRAINFADE on Apr 19, 2019 5:31:32 GMT -5
But then there's the "real life" argument for that, Floyd Mayweather has been undefeated since 1996, Rocky Marciano and Joe Calzaghe retired undefeated, because they were all just that good. If you want one, you could say that because wrestling was more territorial, Bruno was the best in New York, but didn't face a lot of potential challengers as they were in other areas. The increased globalisation of wrestling has made it harder for any one guy to be champion because he'll have to face competitors from around the world, not just anyone who happens to be in the North East at the time. Perfect answer. Back in the day there were a lot of companies so the best guys were all split up. Bruno had to face some of the best now and then and won because he was also one of the best. The rest of the time he was facing less than the best meaning he was rested for when he got truly challenged. When WWE became 1 of few more top guys became concentrated meaning whoever was champion got challenged more and had shorter reigns. Also a good reason why Bruno had such a long title reign vs guys like Lou Thesz and Harley Race. They traveled around facing the best everywhere while Bruno stayed in his territory and waited for them to come to him. But when you look at it in total kayfabe, that answer falls apart. The WWWF portrayed Bruno as Superman, nigh on unbeatable. They never said he was champion for that long because the best guys didn't always come through New York. |
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,009
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Apr 19, 2019 5:41:17 GMT -5
Perfect answer. Back in the day there were a lot of companies so the best guys were all split up. Bruno had to face some of the best now and then and won because he was also one of the best. The rest of the time he was facing less than the best meaning he was rested for when he got truly challenged. When WWE became 1 of few more top guys became concentrated meaning whoever was champion got challenged more and had shorter reigns. Also a good reason why Bruno had such a long title reign vs guys like Lou Thesz and Harley Race. They traveled around facing the best everywhere while Bruno stayed in his territory and waited for them to come to him. But when you look at it in total kayfabe, that answer falls apart. The WWWF portrayed Bruno as Superman, nigh on unbeatable. They never said he was champion for that long because the best guys didn't always come through New York. Not really, they say he was a superman who beat every challenge he came across. Which is true. It's just that list didn't include people like Verne Gagne, the Funks, Baba. Maybe he would have beaten them, they were too "chicken" to travel to face him. |
|
|
|
Post by KobashiChop on Apr 19, 2019 7:55:43 GMT -5
Ever seen his matches? Dude just ran on piss and vinegar. He was tougher and more resilient than anything the heels had to offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toilet Paper Roll on Apr 19, 2019 9:07:06 GMT -5
Look at boxing at the time. It was pretty common for heavyweight champions to hold titles for multiple years. Granted they fought less but if Bruno was fighting the same guy in Philly then Boston and then NY there was no reason to have him lose any of those three
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2019 13:08:13 GMT -5
Those of you answering "he was better/tougher/stronger, etc." are not really understanding the question. I'll blame myself for not elaborating enough, though some of you understood me without further elaboration. I'll buy the Punk reasoning that Bruno didn't defend his belt as much, if that's actually true. They didn't have PPV's back then but they did have the big monthly Garden shows. But then there's the "real life" argument for that, Floyd Mayweather has been undefeated since 1996, Rocky Marciano and Joe Calzaghe retired undefeated, because they were all just that good. If you want one, you could say that because wrestling was more territorial, Bruno was the best in New York, but didn't face a lot of potential challengers as they were in other areas. The increased globalisation of wrestling has made it harder for any one guy to be champion because he'll have to face competitors from around the world, not just anyone who happens to be in the North East at the time. That's actually really good. Exactly what I'm looking for, and good job being one of only like 3 people to understand the question. |
|
Futureraven: Beelzebruv
Bill S. Preston, Esq.
The Ultimate Arbiter of Right And Wrong
Spent half my life here, God help me
Posts: 15,009
|
Post by Futureraven: Beelzebruv on Apr 19, 2019 13:17:50 GMT -5
But then there's the "real life" argument for that, Floyd Mayweather has been undefeated since 1996, Rocky Marciano and Joe Calzaghe retired undefeated, because they were all just that good. If you want one, you could say that because wrestling was more territorial, Bruno was the best in New York, but didn't face a lot of potential challengers as they were in other areas. The increased globalisation of wrestling has made it harder for any one guy to be champion because he'll have to face competitors from around the world, not just anyone who happens to be in the North East at the time. That's actually really good. Exactly what I'm looking for, and good job being one of only like 3 people to understand the question. Lol thanks 😀 |
|
|
|
Post by Hit Girl on Apr 19, 2019 13:20:16 GMT -5
This. It keeps it simple and people believed it. Don't get complicated if there isn't a reason for it. That's fine, but I can't see this being a good kayfabe rationalization, since it would mean either that Bruno/Backlund were so much stronger/tougher/better than any champion we've had since OR that the quality of Bruno/Backlund's challengers was not nearly as good during their reigns. Happens often in real sports. Teams have periods of dominance. No reason why wrestlers couldn't. |
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Apr 19, 2019 13:23:20 GMT -5
If you're looking for something a modern heel could say to explain away Bruno's achievement, then you have him lie (heels lie) and say he didn't defend it that often or that he didn't have strong challengers, but you would need to have Michael Cole or Phillips or Saxton calling him out for being wrong (otherwise, how is the heel going to get heat?). The number of top heels he wrestled during his runs with the title is impressive as hell, and they were from numerous territories. Also, his schedule, especially during his first run, was brutal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kevin Hamilton on Apr 19, 2019 14:15:35 GMT -5
He was the best. It's the most basic kayfabe can get.
|
|
Wardlow on Wardlow 54
Wade Wilson
Don't get Wardlow'd by your Wardlow if you can't Wardlow them back
Posts: 29,279
|
Post by Wardlow on Wardlow 54 on Apr 19, 2019 21:47:40 GMT -5
Asking a question that's kind of unrelated, but related at the same time. I know Backlund lost to Iron Sheik because of an earlier attack and injury angle. But what about when Bruno lost the title to Koloff and later to Graham? Were there shenanigans or cheating involved?
|
|
Crappler El 0 M
Dalek
Never Forgets an Octagon
I'm a good R-Truth.
Posts: 58,479
|
Post by Crappler El 0 M on Apr 19, 2019 22:25:46 GMT -5
Asking a question that's kind of unrelated, but related at the same time. I know Backlund lost to Iron Sheik because of an earlier attack and injury angle. But what about when Bruno lost the title to Koloff and later to Graham? Were there shenanigans or cheating involved? Ivan Koloff won clean. Superstar Graham had his feet on the ropes during the pin. Part of the (kayfabe) story of the Koloff match was that George Steele had broken Bruno's ribs a few weeks before that match. |
|
|
|
Post by bitteroldman on Apr 19, 2019 23:47:24 GMT -5
They sold their souls to the Devil.
|
|
